11. The Chairperson suggested that the reviews in question be taken up on a country-by-country basis and, in accordance with the procedures for these reviews, in alphabetical order.3 Prior to the meeting, questions posed to the three countries in question had been received from Japan, circulated in document IP/C/W/111, and questions posed to Ecuador and Mongolia had been received from the European Communities and their member States, circulated in document IP/C/W/112 and IP/C/W/112/Add.1. Responses to all these questions had been received and circulated prior to the meeting as well (IP/C/W/115, IP/C/W116, IP/C/W/116/Add.1 and IP/C/W/118). In accordance with the procedures, the delegations of Ecuador, Mongolia and Panama were asked to provide a brief introductory overview of the structure of their countries' legislation in the areas covered by the Agreement and of the changes, if any, that they had had to bring about in order to make the legislation compatible with the TRIPS Agreement. Since answers to all these questions had already been circulated in WTO documents, the Chairperson suggested that there was no need for the responses to be read out. If the delegations in question so wished, they could limit themselves to introducing their responses, emphasizing any points that they felt were particularly salient. Questions posed by the European Communities and their member States addressed to Panama, as well as additional questions addressed to Mongolia, had recently been received and would shortly be circulated as document IP/C/W/112/Add.2.
